223. tells us that we ought to be cautious of charging one another with Schism for such things wherein the ancient Churches are like to be involved in the same Condemnation As tho ancient Churches had any thing parallel to the case of our Dissenters or indeed any other Church Sure I am that the instances alledged by Mr. Clerkson are very wide of it as I have shewed already For we charge no other Churches with Schism because they have not the same rites that we use nor do we so much as condemn the Dissenters upon that account But in this we charge them with Schism that they have departed from the Communion of our Church upon the account of rites and they indeed condemning us by their Separation upon that reason do truly involve the ancient Churches in the same condition To make the end answer the beginning Mr. Clerkson concludes with a manifest calumny Hereby says he (l) Prim. ep p. 226. it appears with what judgment and charity some among us will have none to be true Churches that want Diocesan Bishops they hereby blast all the Churches in the Apostles times and the best Ages after as no Churches Herein they are as wise and friendly as if one to secure the height of his own Turret should attempt to blow up all the Houses in the best part of the world nay they blow up their own too It is neither wise nor friendly to charge men with absurd opinions of which neither they nor perhaps any other were ever guilty What witness what evidence of this matter What Books or conversation ever betrayed so great a weakness I never yet heard of any man who made it essential to a Bishop to have many Congregations under them The Papists have several Bishops with a very small flock and such as one Parish-Church may contain They have others who have not so much as one Congregation nor perhaps one Christian within their Diocese But we may guess at the men our Author intends they indeed distinguish with all the ancient Churches between a Bishop and a Presbyter But for the measure of Episcopal Churches They willingly subscribe to S. Jerom's (m) Ep. ad Evagr. judgment that the Bishop of Eugubium is no less a Bishop than he of Rome and the Bishop of Tanis is as much a Bishop as he of Alexandria since it is not the greatness of the City but the Ordination that makes a Bishop In the Primitive times and those next succeeding the extent of Dioceses were very different In Scythia (n) Soz. l. 7. c. 19. there was but one though many Cities and in some places there were Bishops in Villages Some Cities had very large Territories belonging to their Bishops others but small yet all this while these Bishops accounted themselves all of equal authority though their Dioceses might be very unequal and never broke Communion upon that account But if some Presbyters should attempt then to separate from their Bishops and to set up Altar against Altar they incurred the censure (o) Can. Ant. 5. of all Christian Churches and were shut out of Catholick Communion by universal consent As to matter of fact it is plain that in the Primitive times there were no Churches without Bishops such as were acknowledged different from Presbyters And Ignatius (p) Ign. Ep. ad Traâ— is bold to say that without a Bishop Presbyters and Deacons it cannot be called a Church But as for those who separate from their Bishops whose doctrin they acknowledge to be sound and set up Churches and make Ordinations in opposition to them and the whole establishment of a National or Provincial Church These I shall not scruple to Unchurch since in this I have not only the suffrage of antiquity but the consent of all Protestant Churches on my side In France while the Reformed Religion stood there if any departed from the established order of those Churches they were excommunicated and if they should attempt to set up separate Congregations they would have been accounted no Churches (q) Hist Eccles de Bez. T. 2. l. 6. How zealous they were of the Orders appointed in their Synods will sufficiently appear from the case of Morelli and the proceedings against him Nor is it otherwise in Holland or Germany or where-ever the Reformed Religion is received they unchurch all who upon such frivolous pretences as our Dissenters use against us would leave their Communion By this notion of Primitive Episcopacy Mr. Clerkson (r) Prim. Ep. p. 23â— thinks that some mistakes concerning Episcopal Ordinations of ill consequence may be rectified A Bishop in the best ages was no other than the Pastor of a single Church a Pastor of a single Congregation now is as truly a Bishop Why they should not be esteemed to be duly ordained who are set apart by a Pastor of a single Church now I can discern no reason after I have looked every way for it It is the hardest thing in the world for some men to see a reason that makes against them and the fear of finding it makes them commonly look where they are not likely to meet it However it does not seem to be so difficult a matter to assign a reason in the case proposed It is not the being Pastor of one or many Congregations that makes a Bishop but the Order For a Presbyter may be the Pastor of a Congregation and in the Primitive times there were many such but this does not make him a Bishop Nay the Chorepiscopi were Pastors of many Congregations and yet these were not Bishops If these in ancient times should have proceeded upon Mr. Clerkson's grounds and presumed to ordain Presbyters or Deacons or Bishops the Church of those times would have made no difficulty to pronounce the Ordinations null Ischyras pretended to be a Presbyter because Colluthus had ordained him but Athanasius represents it as monstrous that one should esteem himself a Presbyter who was ordained by one who died himself a Presbyter of the Church of Alexandria Nor was Ischyras so absurd as to think that the Ordination received from a simple Presbyter would be valid For in Truth that Colluthus was made a Bishop by Meletius and his name is still in the Catalogue of his Ordinations but renouncing his Schism and those Orders he was received into communion as Presbyter for so he was before he joyned with Meletius and in that degree he died Nor can I find in all Antiquity any one instance of Presbyters making Ordinations without a Bishop nay the Hereticks and Schismaticks of old among all their irregularities are not charged by any of this presumption In the Diocese of Alexandria there were many Presbyters who were the Pastors of single Congregations and so it was in most of the ancient Dioceses as we have shewed before In the Province of Scythia there must be yet a greater number of such Parish Pastors Yet none of these are found to have claimed any right to
A DEFENCE OF Diocesan Episcopacy IN ANSWER to a BOOK OF Mr. DAVID CLARKSON Lately Published ENTITULED Primitive Episcopacy By HENRY MAURICE D. D. LONDON Printed by Hannah Clark for Iames Adamson at the Angel and Crown in St. Paul's Church Yard 1691. Imprimatur Carolus Alston R. P. D. Hen. Episc Lond. Ã Sacris Nov. 4. 1690. THE PREFACE AS in many of his Actions the Devil expresses an Emulation of the divine power and greatness and affects to resemble the most high In the production of Schism he tries to counterfeit the Creation For as God produced this world out of nothing his power operating without any matter So the Devil too creates a Schism from colour or the shadow of a pretence or whatever else may be thought to stand in a nearer degree to nothing Now it is the common way to judge of the nature of Schism by the quality of the pretence if this be slight and frivolous they conceive the other cannot be dangerous and must be in a near disposition to admit a Cure But common experience proves this to be a mistake For on the contrary where the occasion of difference seems to be most trifling there we may observe the animosities to be highest And the reason is plain enough for he who is resolved to force a quarrel will lay hold on any pretence and the more frivolous it is the more bitterness and rancour it discovers in that Spirit that lusteth to envy And at the same time it is a good testimony of the integrity and exactness of the party against which the quarrel is affected that those who were resolved to break are forced to take up with so mean Cavils When you have done all you can to remove occasion from those who seek offence the Prediction of our Lord and his Apostles will continue to be accomplished Offences will come and Heresies and Schisms must be and those who are sincere will be made manifest and those who are otherwise will not be hid The Enemy of Christian peace does confirm the Gospel while he endeavours to destroy it by divisions as the Jews fulfilled the Prophets by condemning the Messiah While the Church remained under the conduct of the Apostles in the simplicity of the Christian Faith and exactness of Discipline it might be expected there should be no Dissenters But those golden times for our comfort have left us their complaints that then there were railings evil surmises and perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth even then there were false Apostles deceitful Workers transforming themselves into the Apostles of Christ Then as well as now there were some who separated themselves and forsook the Assemblies of the faithful S. Paul the popular and complying Apostle who became all things to all men had no small struggle with this spirit of Separation Some were such proficients in a free censoriousness as to think of him as though he walked according to the flesh some disparaged his Gifts and despised his bodily presence as weak and his speech contemptible detracting from him doubtless to add to themselves the character of more acceptable and more edifying Teachers Some were puffed up despised his authority and made divisions in the Churches under his care He who healed all manner of diseases who raised the dead and could cast out a Heathen spirit of Divination found it a harder matter to deal with the spirit of separation that operated in the such false Prophets as bore the forms and titles of Christianity The Divine providence permitted many Demoniacks in our Saviour's and the Apostles time when God conferred miraculous abilities to dispossess them but seems to have shortned the chain of evil Spirits in succeeding ages in the same proportion that he lessened the gifts by which they were mastered But the Spirit of separation was still suffered to practice his Arts of deluding and to break the peace of the Church by infinite variety of pretences Sometimes it was too pure for the mixed society of the Church sometimes it was exalted with new Revelations and those who would not receive them were carnal and in short was so diligent in inventing reasons and in snatching occasions of dividing Communion that all the Topicks of Schism seemed to be exhausted But this Spirit it seems will not be stinted nor confine its self within its own ancient Precedents For in these last times it is become nice in taking offence beyond former examples and beyond all measure acute in assigning causes of dissatisfaction The old Church-dividers swallowed many things that our Dissenters strain at as fundamental corruptions and most of the things which they object as the causes of their departure from us were never known before to have made any difference between Christians For who I pray before our Dissenters separated from a Church for having a set Form and Order of Divine Service Who before our times ever took offence at the use of the Prayer that Christ taught his Disciples What sect from the beginning forsook the Assemblies of the faithful for using the sign of the Cross as the common Ensign of the faith of Christ crucified upon the solemn admission of Church-members Who ever divided the Communion of any Church because it had a Bishop Aerius indeed pretended to see no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter but this was not the reason but only the effect of his separation for having no Bishop of his Communion he was forced to represent them as unnecessary though he durst not condemn their Institution It is strange that these blemishes should so long deform the Church and no Greek or Latin Sectary have the sagacity to discern them that so palpable motives of separation should escape the spirit of Maximilla and the acuteness of Tertullian that the Novatians reputed skillful men in observing faults should be so little perspicacious as not to discover such gross abominations Or that the Donatists should puzzle themselves so long with a story of Cecilian that they could never make out and leave such Topicks as these untouched I cannot think the people of former ages so gross as some of our Virtuosi may represent them From the principles they chose they reasoned as well as we and their Sectaries wanted no wit to find out such objections of Nonconformity as our Dissenters have advanced But as I am apt in some things to be favourable to Antiquity so in this case I cannot but commend the judgment of ancient Schismaticks for not using such frivolous pretences as must unavoidably expose them to the scorn of all discerning men who seeing through such miserable shifts must conclude that no ingenuous mind could use them and nothing but consummate and hardened Hypocrisie persist in them But of all the Pleas preferred by Dissenters against the Church of England none looks more new or more affected than that which concerns Diocesan Episcopacy The old quarrel about the preheminence of Bishops above Presbyters seems in a
Episcopal seats in that Century and in Ireland it has the four Arch-Bishopricks which were not erected till the middle (t) An. 1151. Matth. Par. in Steph. Rege Chron. Norman p. 986. of that Century In this all the printed Copies and six Manuscripts of the Lambeth and Cotton Library do agree But for later Bishopricks there is a difference between the Copies the later receiving these into the list which in the other are not to be found The first printed Copy came (u) Labbe Geogr. eccl in fine Concil out in 1503. and that had a mixture of new and old Bishopricks Miraeus pretended to publish the old Provincial more exactly but either his Copy was not very old or he did not publish it as he found it for his Edition has many Bishopricks of the thirteenth and fourteenth Centuries For in that among the Bishopricks of the Roman Province Aquila is represented as united to Furconium whereas Aquila was (x) Ughell Ital. Sac. T. 1. not made a Bishop's seat till the year 1257. Nor can it properly be said to be united since it was before in the Diocese of Furconium Montefiascone is nam'd there but was not made a Bishoprick till the year 1376. Cortona is there which was not erected till the year 1322. And Mons Cassini erected in the year 1322 is exhibited in the same Edition Now Miraeus (y) Mir. Praef. ante Cod. Prov. p. 64. because he did not find the Arch-Bishoprick of Florence and other erections of the fifteenth Century took his Copy to be ancient when it had so many instances of the Bishopricks of the age preceding Nor did he print any one Copy but jumble several of different ages together So that in the Catalogue which he calls old you have several Bishopricks that never subsisted together for he has Auxima in the Roman Province and at some distance after there is Recana Whereas (z) Ughell Ital. Sacr. T. 1. the one was rais'd upon the suppression of the other in the year 1240. Since Miraeus Carolus a S. Paulo published (a) Geogr. Sacr. inter Notit two Copies of this Provincial one from the French King's and the other from Thuanus his Library but both younger than the eleventh Century Now to return to our Author's observation that there are more Bishopricks in the Roman Province in the old Provincial than in the new we have shewn the contrary if we take that Province for the extent of a Country represented in the old Provincial For there are above twenty more in the new but many of them have left their old relation and are now under other Metropolitans and many more have been new erected than have been sunk But since the oldest of these Provincials is no older than the twelfth Century it will signifie little to the point our Author had undertaken to prove if it should be granted that the Bishopricks of the Roman Province were once more numerous than they are now For the state of the Italian Dioceses about the year 1200. will afford but a poor argument for the extent of the primitive Bishopricks of that Country The face of Ecclesiastical affairs here in the first three or six hundred years after Christ might be very different from what it was at the end of the succeeding Centuries and in particular the Roman Province could not but receive a great change from the civil Revolutions of that Country Now he who from the state of the Italian Churches five hundred years ago will presume to represent Primitive Order and Apostolical Institutions will quickly fall into mistakes not only very absurd but dangerous to the Reformation The Papists would gladly venture all their Controversies upon this issue and there would remain but little of Popery that would not be found primitive if the eleventh and twelfth Centuries might prescribe and the practice of those ages be received as evidence of immemorial Custom Our Author (b) Prim. Ep. p 96. is pleased to tell us in general for Italy I cannot discover that there are more Bishops from there than of old And in all the new Erections that I can find discounting those which are upon old foundations amount not to the number of those which are either dissolv'd or united It is not easie to discover such matters as these without search which he did not think fit to make for if he had pleas'd to examine he could not but have found that the Bishopricks of Italy are much more numerous now than they were four or five ages ago In the Kingdom of Naples where the Dioceses are many and little we may find this by comparing their present number with what they had in foregoing ages There are now (c) Pierre d' Avity Royaume de Naples Luc. de Londa p. 542. Annot. all Istor de Napole in that Kingdom 20 Arch-Bishopricks and 127 Bishops though within half an age before they had not so many as may appear from the account of Thomaso Costo and Miraeus out of Marinus Freccia and Prosper Augustinus reckons of Archbishops and Bishops but 134. But if we compare the present number with what the old Copies of the Provincial represent we shall find yet greater difference of these the later have the greatest number and the older they are the fewer Dioceses they have The latest I have seen which was writ in Clemens the sixth s time who was made Pope Anno 1342. has no more Neapolitan Bishopricks and Arch-Bishopricks than 132. In an old Manuscript of the Lambeth Library there are in that Kingdom but 123 Arch-Bishops and Bishops In another which is the oldest I have seen there are but 116. So that within the compass of four or five hundred years above thirty new Sees have been raised in that Kingdom The Dissolutions or Vnions of which our Author speaks can be no exception to this account in which the total Sums are compar'd As to the small Dioceses of the Kingdom of Naples they are so far from being Primitive that most of them were erected since the tenth Century Campana a small Town has no Diocese beyond the walls yet was it not made a Bishoprick till (d) vghell Ital. Sacr. T. 7. the year 1525. Vesta has no Diocese belonging to it but is no older than Pascal 2d and was rais'd (e) Id. T. 8 9. in the year 1110. Cava had not five hundred Communicants belonging to it but was no Bishoprick till the year 1394. And the small Bishopricks that belong to Beneventum were not made till that was rais'd to an Arch-Bishoprick which was in the tenth Century And the same is observ'd by Vghellus (e) Id. T. 8 9. of many Bishopricks under Brundusium Amalphi and several other new Metropolitans in the South of Italy Another cause of multiplying Bishops in that part of Italy might proceed from the difference between the Greeks and Latins in the ninth and tenth Centuries and the competition of Jurisdiction between the Bishops of
were in Spain 71 Bishops and 7 Metropolitans In a Controversy between the Arch-bishops of Toledo and Valentia it is said that Constantine had divided the Country into Provinces and Dioceses much to the same effect with what has been already produc'd with this agrees the observations of Luitprandus which are taken from the same Books For speaking of the 13th Council of Toledo he saith the number of the Bishops there were 76 of whom 27 subscrib'd by Proxies And in his Chronicon he gives notice of several new Bishopricks erected in Spain in the later end of the seventh Century The Dioceses of Spain must be very large then when so great a Country was divided between 70 or 80 Bishops and especially considering the Province of Narbon was then reckon'd to Spain At the time of the Council of Illiberis Spain seems to have but few Bishops For tho' we find by the Subscriptions that the Bishops had met there from all the Provinces of Spain yet were there in all but 19. And long before this (g) Anno. 254. in St. Cyprians time two Cities in Spain seem'd to belong to one Bishop as may be gather'd from the Inscription of St. Cyprians (h) Ep. 67. Epistle Foelici Presbytero plebibus consistentibus ad Legionem Asturicae Upon which Vasaeus (i) Vasaeus in Chron. Hisp Anno. 256. has this Remark Colligi videtur Legionenses atque Asturicenses eo tempore eidem Episcopo fuisse subjectos licet postea divisi Episcopatus fuerint Our Author (l) Prim. ep p. 40. cites Rabanus Maurus to very little purpose when he makes him to say that there were fewer Bishops at first but in process of time they were Ordain'd not only in Cities but in places where there was no need Which then is the most Primitive way the first or that which comes after After a tedious peregrination our Author (f) Anno. 305. Conc. Illib (m) Prim. ep p. 40. is very kind to let us come nearer home I need not tell you how few Cities there are in Ireland yet Primat Usher tells us out of Nennius that St. Patrick founded there 365 Churches and as many Bishops I hope no reasonable man will blame me as too difficult of belief if I refuse this fable for evidence The authority of Nennius may be question'd without imputation of scepticism and can never pass as long as men have judgment enough to distinguish between History and Legend But I take Nennius his way of writing to be a degree even below Legend But since this fabulous Calendar of Irish Bishops has pass'd without contradiction not that any body ever believ'd it but because it is too gross to be refuted and since it has been and is still urg'd for History in the behalf of Primitive Episcopacy I will endeavour to trace it to its Original and when the ground of the Story is understood it will do the Congregational way but very slender service Arch-Bishop Vsher (n) Antiquit. Eccl. Brit. p. 473. ult Ed. publish'd a Catalogue of old Irish Saints which is divided into three ranks which are distinguish'd one from another as well by time as by merit The first is the best they consisted all of Bishops and their number was 350 they were founders of Churches c. This Order of Saints lasted for four Reigns the last of which was Tuathail but they were not all Irish but Romans and Franks and Britans Now according to Arch bishop Vshers (o) Antiquit. p. 490. Ed. ult Chronology of those Reigns there is above a hundred years from the beginning of St. Patrick's Apostleship to the end of Tuathail only there is one King before him in that Chronological Table which the old Catalogue does not mention That these were the Bishops of St. Patrick's ordination we may find in Jocelin (p) Usher Antiq. p. 492. who says that St. Patrick ordain'd just so many with his own hand and founded 700 Churches To compleat the Irish Calendar Nennius increas'd their number to 365 a singular complement to a lazy Nation to make it holiday for them all the year round Now whether all these liv'd in Ireland or were all ordained by Patrick the Catalogue does not say But it says expresly That they were of several other Nations besides Irish So that this may rather represent the Communion of Patrick and the number of Bishops in Britain and France that kept Easter on the fourteenth of the Moon than his Suffragans of Ireland And the fewness of Bishops in succeeding times and under the second order seems to represent a great change not in the lives of the Bishops for if I mistake not it is the cause that is in the bottom of that Catalogue but in the observances which are there mention'd For whether the Franks by this time had taken another way and the Brittish Churches were under great calamities or Augustin the Monk had introduc'd the Roman customs there are but few Bishops in the second order But supposing these holy Bishops had been all of Ireland yet there is no need of so many Cathedrals for them for they lasted four Reigns which makes up a hundred years And though all the Bishops seats in Ireland had not been above fifty they might easily have afforded 350 Saints in the compass of a hundred years But because there are but sixty years allow'd for St. Patrick's Government in Ireland even in that and the surviving generation this number of Bishops might easily rise from fifty I mention this number because sometimes Ireland has had so many Dioceses or more as we may see in a copy of the Provincial publish'd by (q) Geogr. Sacr. S. Paulo which hath more Seats in it than that of which Cambden speaks After all I am not well satisfi'd but all St. Patrick's Bishops may be a fable and he himself only a Saint of imagination For who can tell but Patricius Arvernensis may have sunk a day lower in the Calendar and made the Irish a Patricius Hibernensis Or the Spanish Patrick (r) Luitpr Advers of Malaga who according to Luitprandus lays claim to that day might appear to the Irish in a Dream as St. George did to our Country-men and become their Protector and at last their Apostle For the Calendar is the ground upon which the Legendaries run divisions and as barren as it seems to be it has produced a world of devout Fables For in old time give a Monk but a name and he would quickly write a life Our Author taking S. Patrick's (s) Prim. Ep. p. 40. 365 fabulous Bishopricks for effective is not content but would increase their number about the twelfth Century Afterwards says he the number of Bishops increased in Ireland so that when Malachias went into Ireland near 600 years after S. Patrick Anno 1150. (t) Bern. vit Malach. Vnus Episcopatus non esset contentus uno Episcopo sed singulae paene Ecclesiae singulos haberent
Episcopos That Bishopricks were multiplied in Ireland in Malachy's time Bernard does indeed complain of but that before this increase they were 365 neither he nor any body else of that time does affirm Nor is it likely for a man less eloquent then S. Bernard could not have omitted it For what could have exposed this humour of multiplying Bishops more effectually than to have shewn that there were already in that Kingdom so many more Dioceses in proportion to the extent of it than in any Christian Country in the World Bernard (u) Bernard vit Malach. makes heavy complaint that it was a thing unheard of from the beginning of Christianity Bishops were chang'd and multiply'd without order and without reason Yet for all this storming his friend Malachy had a large Diocese to look after for he was not content says Bernard to go about his Episcopal City of Conneth but he went out into the Country and visited the Towns of his Diocese and all this on foot But within twenty years of the time we are speaking of we have a certain account of the Irish Dioceses For when Henry the second went (x) Anno 1171. over to Ireland there were (y) Joh. Brompton X. Script Col. 1070. but twenty-nine Bishops in all that Kingdom and four Arch-Bishops or thirty according to the reckoning of Gervasius (z) Cron. Gervasij X. Scr. Col. 1420. The former number is confirmed by Benedictus Abbas in the Life of King Henry II. And even of this number some were but lately erected For (a) Eadmer Hist Nov. l. 2. p. 36. in the year 1095. Murchertagh King of that part of Ireland with his Clergy and People desired leave of Anselm Arch-Bishop of Canterbury who was then Primate of all Ireland as well as England to found a new Bishoprick at Waterford complaining that in those parts they had hitherto wanted the presence of a Bishop requesting him to ordain Malchus for their Bishop whom they had sent over for that purpose which he did accordingly So far was Ireland from being overstocked with Bishops at that time The Copies of the Provincial are of little use to shew any thing of the ancient state of this Country for all of them are later than the year 1150 because they all have the four Arch-Bishops the Irish Church having never had (ae) Matth. Par. in Steph. Anno 1151. Sim. Duwelm Anno 1152. Gervasi Chron. Anno 1171. any before that year though Arch-Bishop Vsher would have Armagh excepted When we had come so near home as Ireland I was in hopes our wandring after Village-Bishops had been at an end especially when he had come to the dregs of his evidence Nennius and the Irish Legends But I know not how a sudden fancy transports our Author to Afric and thither I must follow a proper place to look rarities and unusual sights It cannot indeed be denied that in this Country there were Bishops if not in Villages yet in Municipia or Burrough-Towns but that this was the primitive state of that Church we cannot allow And the multiplying of Bishops being occasioned there by the Schism of the Donatists cannot be alledged for a precedent since the Bishops of that time complained of it in the Conference of Carthage as a wrong and an innovation But of this there is a more particular account in another Book (c) Vind. of Prim. ch p. 516. which I am not willing to transcribe But yet what our Author would put upon us ought not to pass without Examination (d) Prim. Ep. p. 41. In five of the Provinces of the African Diocese he might have said six for so they are reckoned in the Conference of Carthage Tripolis being added to the other five there were in St. Austin 's time near 900 Bishops And this he proves by adding the Donatist Bishops to the Catholick there being 500 of the one and 400 of the other (b) Prim. Ep. p. 41. As for the Catholicks the utmost of St. Austin's account in the abstract of the Conference is but 465. And yet in another Book he reckons (e) Centum ferme Episcopi contr Don. post Coll. c. 24. not the Absents full a hundred which in his Abstract he sets at 120. And for the Donatists who are reckon'd 400 we are not so easily to admit their account S. Augustin never admitted it though our Author says he did not deny they were 400. It is true he does not positively deny it because he could not be certain of their number but he does every where suggest that they boasted without reason and made themselves more numerous than they were For when they pretended to have many absent and more than the Catholicks he turns the pretence into a jest What says he (f) Aug. post Coll. c. 24. had some Pestilence invaded them that a third part of their number should be sick together For they had acknowledged that they were all present excepting such whom age or sickness had detained And in all his accounts of the Conference he detects their frauds in subscribing for the absents as if they had made their appearance And among the subscriptions there was one found who had been some time dead and they could not deny it But be the number of those Schismaticks what they will it is not reasonable to admit them into the list of the Bishops of that Country since they set up Altar against Altar oftentimes in the same City and generally in the same Diocese where a Catholick Bishop was plac'd and sometimes set up three or four against one So there is no reason that these should swell the account of African Bishops We reckon a Parish with us to have but one Rector though an Independent or Anabaptist Teacher may set up in it a separate Assembly or though a speaking Presbyterian Elder the most forward and fiercest of all our Church-dividers should hold a Conventicle there for a Nursery to other Sects But we have reason our Author thinks to take the Donatists into the account since the Catholicks decreed that when the Donatists were reduc'd those places among them which had Bishops should continue to be Episcopal seats If he had thought fit to consider the order of time and how different the state of the African Church before the Conference at Carthage was from that which followed it this apparition of an Argument had vanished Before Marcellinus his Decree the Catholicks of Africk made several temporary Provisions for the reclaiming of the Donatists And that no encouragements might be wanting to invite either the People or their Bishops to be reconciled to the Church sometimes they order that if a Donatist Bishop should prevail with his people to leave their schism he should remain still their Bishop Sometime that the People who had a Bishop heretofore and were converted from the Donatists might without a new order from a Synod chuse a Bishop of their own or if they would chuse rather to be annexed
Ordination The next exception against this Synod is (z) Prim. ep p. 62. that it was of little authority not admitted by the Greeks into their Code till the Trullan Council Nor by the Latins some ages after it was held c. Nor by the African Churches who rejected and would not be oblig'd by its Canons for Appeals to Rome How soon or late this Synod was generally receiv'd does little concern the Canon in dispute which does not establish any thing new but only affirms ancient Practice And if the matter of this Canon was generally observ'd where the Synod of Sardica was not yet owned it is plain that this matter depends upon better authority than the sanction of a Council immemorial Custom and the general agreement of Churches Without regard to this Canon the bounds of ancient Bishopricks were accounted sacred and not lightly to be changed Some Villages in Pentapolis accounted considerable enough to make a Diocese in troublesom times because they had immemorially been annex'd to the Episcopal City were judged by their poeple to have been settl'd in that condition by Apostolical Order and therefore the people of those places were earnest they should return again to their first dependance The Region Mareotes was large enough to make a good Diocese of it self yet when a Bishop was set up in one part of it Athanasius complains that it was done against ancient Tradition which in such cases as these was to take place Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria having made a Bishop in a mean place where there had been none before is blam'd as a violator of the establish'd Order of the Church So that if the Synod of Sardica was not received any where for many ages after it was held yet this Canon against making Bishops in small places where there had been none before was it seems generally approv'd at leastwise the matter of it was accounted equal and fit There are Orders of other Synods in the same age to the same effect and I do not know of any ancient Assembly or so much as a single Writer that ever made any exception against this Rule But on the contrary when Bishops were ordein'd in small places where there had been none before we find complaints against it as a violation of old establishment and even in Afric where such innovations grew frequent the complaints were loud on both sides In the Conference at Carthage the Donatists as well as Catholicks complaining of these violations of ancient limits (a) Prim. ep p. 62. Nor need I say that this Synod is misunderstood and that this restraint is laid on Bishops of another Province Our Author speaks reason for surely he needs not say what he had said already and to so little purpose nor need I repeat here what I have reply'd before But what he adds deserves consideration for the newness and singularity of the Argument It would be much says our Author for our satisfaction if we could understand punctually what numbers they thought sufficient for one Presbyter and we may have the best direction that can be expected in such a case from Chrysostom (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys Or. in Ignat. who affirms that one hundred and fifty Souls was thought as much as one Pastor could well and more than he could without great labour discharge His words are It is a very laborious thing for one man to have the charge of a hundred and fifty How much this was to the satisfaction of Mr. Clerkson I will not enquire how little it is to the purpose will I hope sufficiently appear from what I am going to reply First then Chrysostom makes not the least mention of a Presbyter nor of the number sufficient for his cure but in general says It is a difficult thing for one man to take the care of a hundred and fifty only Whether one Presbyter or one Bishop or one Captain he does not say And this is clear that at the same time he makes such a little flock so formidable a charge he makes (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys in Ign. T. 5. P. 501. the Apostles to commit a City of twenty myriads or two hundred thousand to the cure of Ignatius and therefore from thence gives an estimate of the person and of what talents he must be possessed to whom the Apostles would deliver so great a charge The design therefore of Chrysostom in that passage is to set out the character of Ignatius to advantage from the greatness of the City of which he was Bishop and to set off the City he compares it with the lowest or meanest Congregations but does not give the least intimation that no one Presbyter had greater or that a place of more inhabitants than a hundred and fifty requir'd the care of a Bishop If to commend the chief Magistrate of some very great City one should borrow this of Chrysostom and say that it is a difficult thing to govern a Family of twenty people or to keep good order in a Town of but two hundred inhabitants and therefore his endowments must be extraordinary into whose hands the government of so great a City is committed he would be thought a very strange Critick who from such a complement should remark that a Family ought to consist of no more than twenty or that a Constable ought not to undertake the keeping of the peace in a Village that has more than two hundred inhabitants and therefore where there is a greater number it requires a Mayor and Aldermen to undertake the charge Or if upon a Commemoration of some Bishop of London the Preacher should think fit to turn the greatness of the City into a Topic of that Bishops commendation and say that a cure of a hundred and fifty Souls is a great and difficult charge and great care to be us'd in providing even for such a place an able Pastor and therefore what wonderful abilities must he be thought master of who was judg'd capable of being the Pastor of so vast a City Would any man that is awake conclude from hence that there is never a Parish-Presbyter in England that had a greater cure So pertinent is that direction which our Author fancy'd to have found in Chrysostom for understanding punctually what numbers they anciently thought sufficient for one Presbyter To the same effect he proceeds to tell us (d) Prim. ep p. 63. that upon this account one Presbyter was not thought sufficient for a place that contain'd three or four hundred inhabitants For this we desire some proof but I am affraid we must expect long There is one thing more in our Authors remarks upon the Canon of Sardica that deserves to be taken notice of and that is that where one Presbyter is not sufficient there a Bishop ought to be ordein'd It is a rule he has made to himself by inverting the Canon of Sardica that forbids the making of a Bishop in a very little City where even
but that my Author continues to abuse his Reader after the same manner in another Chapter which conteins for the most part such allegations as he had produced before but something more being added it seemed necessary to add some brief reflections (e) Prim. ep p. 217. When the Bishop could not be content with a moderate charge but extended it to such a largeness that it became ungovernable by him This pretended ruling was no longer government but anarchy as Isidore speaks of a Bishop of his time l. 3. cap. 319. That this is said of a Bishop does by no means appear from that Epistle but the circumstances direct us to understand it rather of a Civil Judg than of a Bishop Vnder such a ones government says Isidore which was anarchy rather than government punishment went before accusation for being an unreasonable man it is no wonder he should act so preposterously and pervert all methods of Justice But that this was a Bishop or had a large Bishoprick and would not be content with a moderate charge but extended it to such a largeness to be ungovernable Mr. Clerkson did not find in Isidore but in his sleep for surely his Conscience must be a-sleep when he knowingly perverts the words of ancient Authors to impose upon the World With the same integrity he useth Basil 's words Through this ambition of governing all all Church government came to nothing de Sp. S. c. ult This governing all which makes the passage look as if it were directed against large Bishopricks is not in Basil but without this addition Mr. Clerkson might think the citation would not be to his purpose The place deserves to be taken notice of and when I have represented it as it is in the Author let the World judg who is most concerned in that reproach Every one says that Father (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will be a Divine tho his Soul be blemished with ten thousand spots Hence it is that those who are given to change strengthen their Faction Impatient ambition invades the high places of the Church without call or ordination despising the Oeconomy of the Holy Ghost and all the precepts of the Gospel (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hence it is that there is so much rushing upon the Offices of the Church every one intruding into those sacred places and through that ambition Anarchy hath seized the Church and the people are left without government Hence it is that the exhortations of the Bishops are vain and ineffectual because every one is more forward to rule others than to obey his ignorance and his pride possessing him with a vain opinion of his own abilities (h) Bas l. de Sp. S. c. 30. p. 225. Here is not the least notice taken whether the Bishopricks were litle or great much less is this confusion charged upon their too great extent It is ambition only that is here reproved and the impatience of those who when they could not in a regular way advance themselves to the government of the Church became Bishops of their own making Upon a supposition that a Primitive Bishop had but one Congregation Mr. Clerkson proceeds to shew that every Congregation which is always adequate to a Church in his notion had a right of ordering it self and appointing what rites it thought fit And to that purpose he observes out of Socrates and Sozomen that in several parts of the World there were different usages and customs But is there any instance in antiquity of people that separated from their Bishop and their own Church because they would not comply with the customs and rites received there For instance in Rome it was customary to fast on Saturday In other Countries they fasted the day before Now did any Roman Christian forsake his Church because they did not fast on Friday Or did any African part Communion because the Saturday was not observed there as it was in Rome S. Augustin's judgment in this point is well known and universally approved He directs every Christian to comply with the rites and customs of the Church where he happens to be tho he find some things different from the usage of his own Church The reverence which the Primitive Christians had for the Forms in which they were brought up raised in them some scruple when they came to observe those of other Churches to be different But as to their own particular rites and usages proper to each respective Country they were so peaceably and religiously observed that they were never made a pretence of Separation or so much as the occasion of a Controversy Some differences indeed did arise very early between Churches of different Countries about the time of Easter and rebaptizing of Hereticks but in the conclusion every one adhered to his own way which he thought the best and he was generally blamed who took upon him to prescribe to the rest Let us suppose therefore in this case an African Christian who had lived some time in Rome and taken a liking to the peculiar usages of that Church should after his return home disparage the received order of his own Church and to shew how much he had improved by Travel indeavour to introduce foreign Customs What treatment think you would such a one have received from S. Augustin or S. Cyprian Such a troubler of the peace and order of the Church would soon find himself cast out by the severest censures unless they might think it more advisable to send him to the Exorcist This was plainly the case between the Church of England and the first Dissenters Some of the English Exiles took I know not what fondness to the usages of some Protestant Churches abroad and a strange dislike to their own way They returned home with foreign manners and set them up in opposition to the order of their own Church and at last parted Communion upon this pretence It is not here a place to enquire into their reasons or to make a comparison between what they chose and what they rejected This only I may be bold to say that their Schism is without example either in ancient or later ages For who ever separated from the Church of Geneva in favour of some peculiarities he might have seen in Zurich Or what French-Man forsook the Communion of the French Churches because they had some Ceremonies different from those of Holland Or did a Hollander ever run out of the Church because the Preacher was uncovered out of pure zeal to the custom of France where the Preacher took the same liberty with the Congregation of being covered too Our Church does not pretend to prescribe to any other nor does she think it reasonable any other should prescribe to her but as all other Churches use their discretion in appointing what rites they think most meet so does she and is the only Church in the World that I know forsaken upon that account Yet Mr. Clerkson (i) Prim. ep p.
manner to be dropped and all the difficulty now to remain concerning the bounds of the Bishops Territory and the numbers belonging to his Inspection yet in ancient times this made no difference For Sozomen (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 7. c. 19. observing the great inequality of ancient Dioceses and some other little usages in which the Churches of one Country differed from those of another commends the wisdom of ancient Bishops who looked upon it as a great piece of folly to divide communion about these matters The greatness or smallness of a Diocese making in their opinion no difference in the office The Synod assembled at Antioch in their Letter (b) Soz l. 3. c. 8. to Julius Bishop of Rome let him understand that they do not account themselves inferiour to him in authority though their Churches were not so great or populous as his but are far from disowning him to be of their Order because his Diocese did exceed theirs And Jerom (c) Hieron Ep. ad Evagr. declares himself freely upon this point that the greater or lesser compass of a Diocese made no alteration in the Episcopacy but the poor Bishop of Eugubium had the same authority and order with that of Rome Yet now it seems this difference is become fundamental And Mr. Clarkson contends that there is but one sort of Bishops to be endured such only who have the charge of no more than a single Congregation This we are told by him the Apostles intended this the first three or four Ages practised and within that space of time there was no other Episcopacy How well he hath performed this undertaking will appear from this Book in which I have been so far from dissembling or passing by any Testimony that might seem material that I am afraid to have incurred very just censure for being too minute and punctual in my answers beyond the merit of the Objections Yet for this I may be allowed to use the plea of Apuleius (d) Ne videar cuipiam si quid ex frivolis praeteriero id agnovisse potius quam contempsisse quod si forte inepta videbor oppido frivola velle defendere illis debet ea res vitio verti quibus turpe est etiam haec objectasse non mihi culpae dari cui honestum erit etiam haec diluisse Apul. Apol. on the like occasion that I have taken notice of many frivolous things least to some I might seem to decline them as unanswerable and not to omit them out of just contempt And if my answers to some mean and captious remarks may seem sometimes to tast of the futility of the Objections yet I hope this will be imputed to him who was not ashamed to offer such things in evidence and not to me who was concerned to disprove them Some may perhaps expect an Apology for delay that the Book came not out sooner But for this I am not solicitous for an excuse apprehending rather the contrary fault that it is come out too soon For I found in the Book I answer so many marks of haste and precipitation that I thought my self obliged to take warning though the design of that work seems to have taken up a great part of the Author's life In such variety of facts so remote and many of them so obscure there are too many things to be considered to admit of haste And after all the care and the leisure one can take it is neither easie nor usual in this kind of work to avoid oversights and omissions of some things very material The Author of the Preface may perhaps think himself neglected that he is not thought considerable enough to deserve an answer He promised himself it seems that the Epistle Recommendatory should find the same entertainment with the worthy Treatise of Mr. Clarkson But Diviners are sometimes disappointed For my part I am resolved to make a difference between the Book and the Recommendation And I hope Mr. Chauncey will see some reason why he should not take it ill I wish he had been able to have represented the references right But we must forgive where it is not to be had and I dare say the good man did his best But why should he be angry with Dr. Sherlock for defending Protestant Principles against the Papists upon the grounds of the Church of England Why did not he or some of his Brethren step out to vindicate Congregational Episcopacy against Father Ellis and his three Collegues who made but four Dioceses of this whole Kingdom For God's sake tell me who maintained Protestant Principles then upon the foundation of the Dissenters But the Serpent and the venomous Vermine are subtler than the other Beasts of the field for in hard weather they are not to be found on the face of the Earth but are crept into their holes but when a warmer season comes they crawl out to snap at the heels of those who had endured the severities of the winter If he expected the same Treatment with Mr. Clarkson he should have written intelligibly and writ sense But when he runs the Changes upon Jus Divinum Humanum and Apostolicum when he talks of Hermaphroditick Divinity of Office-Charge of Office Discrimination of Appendix-Courts and Vestments and Canons among the Heteroclites of his Divinity what can a man do but wonder and keep silence Believe me I would as soon dispute with a Paper-mill as undertake to answer a man of such amazing language But for the Heteroclites I may perhaps know what they may import it is when a thing changes its kind As for Example when a man leaves his shop and the business of his Calling to write Letters Recommendatory of what he does not understand Errata's which disturb the Sense PAge 18. Line 14. for Passover read Pentecost p. 31. l. 6. for disprove r. prove p. 37. l. 18. for future r. further p. 69. l. 6. for useful r. unfit p. 78. l. 20. for first r. fifth p. 98. l. 9. after Bishop of add the City p. 358. l. 27. for populously r. pompously p. 361. l. 16. after he does add not p. 406. l. 8. for Fermissus r. Telmissus A DEFENCE OF Diocesan Episcopacy c. IT is an easie matter for those who confine their Charity as they do their Primitive Episcopacy to a single Congregation to charge all who differ from them as Men wholly governed by Prejudice and Interest The fondness they have for their own Conceits renders them incapable of any Jealousie of their Truth or Evidence and if these Notions do not receive such Entertainment as the Indulgent Author is perswaded they deserve and Success do not answer (a) Mr. Clarkson's Primitive Episcopacy pag. 1. Opinion it must be ascrib'd to the unequal Encounter they had with Prejudice and Interest Things that do frequently baffle the best Evidence in Persons otherwise very discerning and judicious It is just indeed that they should bear the reproach of Insincerity
word Many would never have yielded us an hundred Converts and yet it seems it comprehended no less than five thousand Wherefore we may reasonably conclude that those general words that denote exaggeration of multitude and a sum unusual and wonderful cannot but comprehend more than those thousands of the first Conversions This would be sufficient tho' there should be no farther Evidence to perswade any equal Reader that the Church of Jerusalem was now grown too numerous to meet all in one place especially considering the Christian Assemblies in those times were held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from house to house But there remains yet another instance that seems more definite and decisive For James and the Elders of Jerusalem observe to St. Paul that there were many Myriads of the Circumcision which believed (a) Acts 21.20 Thou seest Brother how many Thousands Myriads of Jews there are which believe and they are all zealous of the Law The multitude must come together c. If these Myriads were present at Jerusalem when St. Paul was there there will be little reason to deduct nineteen parts out of twenty (b) Prim. Ep. p. 6. upon the account of Strangers as our Author undertakes to do For I hope to make it appear that the Pentecost was over before the Apostle arriv'd at Jerusalem Now lest these great numbers of Converts should grow into a Diocese consisting of several Congregations Mr. Clerkson interposes a timely Caveat in these words (c) Prim. Ep. p. 4. What may be argu'd from hence for great numbers of Christians in Cities proceeds upon a meer mistake which I shall clearly remove For it is but a small proportion of those Thousands that can in reason be accounted to the Inhabitants of Jerusalem and so fix'd Members of that Church for they were Converted at one of the great Feasts at which time the Inhabitants were not by far a twentieth part of those that were assembled in the City This Exception concerns only the three thousand who were converted on the Feast of Pentecost but the five Thousand that followed and the Multitudes of Men and Women and the Multiplying greatly and the great Company will remain to the Church of Jerusalem notwithstanding this exception For our Author does not so much as suggest that these Accessions were made upon any of the three Feasts and therefore without these three Thousand there will be sufficient number for several Congregations That it may appear what small proportion the Inhabitants of Jerusalem (a) Prim. Ep. p 4. held to the Multitude that resorted thither on the solemn Feasts our Author enters into an enquiry both after the number of the Inhabitants of that City and of those that resorted from other places to those Solemnities To begin with the latter of these (b) Jos de bell Jud. l. 7. c. 1. p. 969. Josephus tells us and out of him (c) H. E. l. 3. c. 5. Eusebius that Cestius Gallus willing to represent to Nero who contemn'd the Jews the strength of that People desired the Priests to take an account of the number and to make the Story short from the number of the Pascal-Sacrifices they computed all the Jews present at that Passover to be about three Millions (d) Pr. Ep. p. 5. But then they were all in a manner Foreigners (e) Jos B. J. l. 7. c. 17. for a great part of that multitude came from abroad whereas the Inhabitans of Jerusalem (a) Jos cont App. l. 1. were but sixscore Thousand as we learn by Hecataeus And that we may not fancy Hecataeus to have under-reckon'd the Inhabitants of Jerusalem our Author intimates a quite contrary suspicion It may be Hecataeus or his Informer over-reached as well in the Number of the Citizens as in the Measure of the City He makes the Circuit of it fifty Furlongs whereas (b) Jos B. J. l. 6. c. 17. Josephus says it was but thirty-three and the Circumvallation of Titus but thirty-nine From all this therefore he concludes that the Inhabitants of Jerusalem upon the most favourable Computation will scarce make the twentieth part of the Multitude which usually attended those Feasts and consequently not a twentieth part of the Converts mention'd in the Acts can be supposed to belong to the Church of Jerusalem Although I have already shew'd that this concerns only the three Thousand converted on the day of Pentecost yet because it is new and carries with it the air of Demonstration I will beg the Readers patience while I let him see with how great Pains and Learning some Authors can trifle For to find out the proportion between the Inhabitants of Jerusalem and the Pascal Assemblies it is necessary to know the number of each at the same time or at least-wise in the same Age. Now Hecataeus from whom he learns the number of the Citizens liv'd under Alexander the Great and Ptolomy the Son of Lagus but the numbers of those who resorted to the Passover was taken by the order of Cestius Gallus under Nero i. e. above three hundred and fifty years after The Inhabitants of Jerusalem might be much more numerous in the Apostles time than in the Age of Hecataeus and therefore this Calculation cannot be certain and this Spectre of Demonstration vanishes That I may not seem to want a due regard for Mr. Clerkson's diligence upon this Point I will not dismiss his Calculation with so short a Reply but examine every point of it apart and shew of what consequence it may be to the present Question concerning Congregational Episcopacy 1. The three Millions return'd to Nero came from no authentick Census or any certain account but only from conjecture and one may reasonably suspect that the Priests to set out the greatness of the Nation to a Prince who had them in contempt would be apt to over-reckon 2. Jerusalem could not receive so many Millions if the circuit of it were but thirty-three furlongs as we read in Josephus and our Author does contend it was no more 3. If this Account of the Priests should be admitted yet that Passover might be extraordinary and like that of Josiah of which it is said (a) 2 Kings 23.22 that surely there was not holden such a Passover from the days of the Judges that judg'd Israel nor in all the days of the Kings of Israel nor of the Kings of Judah And that this Number was extraordinary appears from Josephus who accounting for the incredible Number said to be slain and taken in Jerusalem informs us that the Jews resorted thither out of all the Country and were unawares shut up in that fatal Siege and yet the Sum was about twelve hundred thousand persons not half of that number upon which our Author calculates Yet this seem'd so extraordinary (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jos B. J. l. 6. c. 45. Ed. Frob. that Josephus to make it pass observes that the greatest part indeed were Jews but not
the chief of Italy all the children are christen'd in one Font in the old Church of St. John Which Leandro Alberti (c) Gloss v. Baptisterium says was a Temple of Mars which Dufresne observes Tanquam veteris moris Institutum It being the old way for all who liv'd in or near the same City to be baptiz'd in one Church i. e. the Cathedral But the use of the Altar was more general and more constant for every Lord's day in the primitive times all the Faithful receiv'd the Sacrament And the administration of it does require more time and more room than any other office of Christian Religion For more may pray together or hear the Scriptures or a Sermon with convenience than can receive the Sacrament which was delivered (a) Eus H. E. l. 6. c. 43. with a form of words to every person that receiv'd it to which the receiver answered Amen So that in a numerous Congregation it must grow inconvenient and soon stand in need of several other Churches Wherefore it seems most probable that the Christian Assemblies were first parted on this account and Titles or parish-Churches erected as supplements of the chief Altar Let a man but consider the state of the Church of Rome under (b) Eus H. E. l. 6. c. 43. Cornelius when above fifteen hundred persons were maintain'd from the publick stock of the Church what numbers of believers there must be in that City and then let him conceive if he can how so many thousands could meet every Lord's day in one Church and receive the Communion at one Altar And in Lions c where in Severus his time there are said to have been eighteen thousand Christians it is not easy to conceive how one Altar could be sufficient We are told indeed that we have many thousands in a Parish that hath but one Altar but if our Communions (d) Irenaeus martyrizatus est cum omni populo Christianorum XVIII M. Thron S. Benig ap Dacher T. 1. were as frequent and as numerous as those of the Primitive Church many Altars I am sure would be necessary to such Parishes To conclude the words of the counterfeit Damasus now under debate do not deny to those Parish-Churches the administration of the Eucharist for when he appoints them for Baptism and Penance he doth not exclude all other Christian Offices such as Prayer reading of the Scripture or the Communion but names those of Baptism and Penance because even in his time they were not allow'd to every Parish-Church But this Damasus liv'd later than to think of a Church without Mass or without an Altar and he had taken care not only for such Churches but for the Sepulchres of Martyrs that they should have Altars raised over them and Masses celebrated long before the time of Marcellus and ascribes the ordering of that matter to (a) Pseud Damas in Felix 1. Felix 1. And (b) Baron An. 275. Baronius seems to be troubled that this Author had not done it sooner and therefore thinks fit to let the Reader know that all this had been provided before And lastly the expression quasi Dioceses referring to Baptism and Penance import that those services indeed belong'd only to a Cathedral and therefore the granting of those priviledges to Parishes made them seem like Dioceses whereas * Innoc. Ep. ad Dacen Aug. Conf. c. 2. vid. Euseb H. E. l. 7. c. 11. l. 9. c. 2. every Martyrium every Cemitery and common Title had the priviledge of the Communion That there was no preaching in the Parishes of Rome may very well be granted without reducing the Christians to a single Congregation For if (a) Soz. l. 7. c. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozomen was not misinform'd there was no preaching in any Church in Rome not in the Bishops for in Rome neither the Bishop nor any other taught in the Church And Valesius takes notice that we have no Homilies of any Roman Bishop before Leo 1. and to confirm this of the Historian he observes that Cassiodore who was well acquainted with the customs of the City had translated this passage which he would scarce have done and publish'd it in Rome it self if he had not known it to be true (b) Prim. Ep p. 16 17. To carry on this notion of but one assembly of Christians in the greatest Cities (c) Petav. Animad in Epiph. p. 276. Petavius is cited with an ample character that he had no superior for learning among the Jesuits nor any to whom Prelacy is more oblig'd But our Author is as much oblig'd to him as the Prelats if while other Witnesses speak doubtfully and with reserve He is positive that in the fourth Age there was but one Church or Title ordinarily in a City and proves it by Epiphanius who speaks of more Titles in Alexandria as a thing singular and peculiar to that City there being no instance thereof but in Rome I am willing to believe our Author did not read that place himself but took it upon trust For Petavius affirms there the direct contrary to that for which our Author makes him so positive For these are his Words You may guess says he that this was a singular manner of Alexandria or at leastwise in use in very few Churches that Epiphanius makes so particular mention of this way of Alexandria as if it had been peculiar to that Church but the same thing had been long before ordered elsewhere particularly in Rome I do not doubt but there were many Titles or Churches within the pomaeria of the greater Cities since the people could not all meet within the Walls of one Church and therefore had Presbyters appointed for those Churches into which the Christians were distributed In smaller and lesse populous Towns there was but one Church in which all were assembled together such as the Cities of Cyprus were upon which account Epiphanius observes the manner of Alexandria as an unusual thing and strange to his People This is what Petavius delivers there You may guess says he as our Author fancies that this was peculiar to Alexandria but the same thing was ordered elsewhere and he did not doubt but it was so in all the greater Cities But that Petavius should prove this also by the Council of Neocaesarea can 13. is an oversight yet stranger For though Petavius cites that Canon yet it is not to prove this or any thing like it but having entred into a discourse about Chorepiscopi he shews from that Canon that they were Bishops and not Presbyters because they had the priviledge of officiating in the City-Church in the presence of the Bishop or his Presbyters whereas that priviledge is expresly deny'd the Country-Presbyters But how our Author came to fancy this passage to be for his purpose I will not undertake to divine I have hitherto only shew'd what Petavius had observ'd concerning the Alexandrian Parishes but whether his Observation be just is another question
then but few Bishops because Christianity was not much advanced and their Churches were but few but the contrary is affirmed of this very time by Writers who lived then And Cyprian does expresly say (t) Jampridem per omnes Provincias per Urbes singulas ordinati sunt Episcopi Cypr. Ep. 55. that Bishops had long before this been setled in all the Provinces and in every City And how extraordinary this Synod must be esteemed at that time may be observed from another passage of the same Epistle where it is remark'd as no inconsiderable thing that sixteen or seventeen Bishops were present at the Consecration of Cornelius A poor business to be taken notice of if the Roman Province had then been so well stocked with Bishops as it is now And now we are taking our leave of Italy let us look back and from what has been observ'd make this General Conclusion that the number of Bishops has been increasing there in every age ever since the Primitive times excepting times of extraordinary desolation And what Vghellus observes of Clusium and some other Bishopricks is true of most of them that from one large Diocese it was crumbl'd into many small ones This City says he (u) Vghel Ital. Sal. T. 3. in old time was possessed of a very large Diocese which the Popes by degrees have dissipated and convey'd to other Cathedrals which they erected Nay some after the lopping off of several Branches still remain considerable as the same Author observes (x) Vghel Ital. 5. T. 1. of Asculum The Diocese that now remains though much diminish'd by the Erections of new Cathedrals is not very small for after all this it has retain'd 156 Parish Churches From Italy we are returning home by the way of Spain where notwithstanding the Inquisition and great Bishops who have very large Dioceses and take themselves under those Circumstances to be jure Divino as their Predecessors did at Trent our Author ventures to prosecute his design and makes enquiry after Village-Bishops (y) Prim. Ep. p. 37. In Spain the twelfth Council of Toledo (z) Anno 681. takes notice of one made a Bishop in Monasterio Villulae and another in Suburbio Toletano c. and of others in aliis vicis villulis It is true he adds that the Bishops there allow it not but order it otherwise for the future But for the satisfaction of the Reader it may not be amiss to add the Reasons of that Synod against this matter 1. (a) Res nobis novellae praesumptionis Usurpatione sese intulit pertractanda That it was an Innovation or a Novel Presumption 2. It was against the received Laws of the Church and Canonical Constitutions Canonica Constitutio id fieri omnimoda ratione refellit 3. That it was against Scripture and the order of St. Paul to Titus to make Bishops in Cities and then cites several Canons (b) Oportet in nullo Monasterio quemlibet Episcopum Cathedram collocare Conc. Carth. Frag. apd Mabillon Anal. p. 1. of Councils against it as that of Sardica and two African Canons and Concilium Tauritanum Title the second And in conclusion they null such Ordinations But what sort of Bishopricks they had anciently in Spain shall appear in due place To bring Episcopacy yet one step lower our Author (c) Prim. Ep. p. 38. finds Bishops not only in Villages but in Monasteries generally less then Villages and this he thinks will be a proof of the Question in hand What will these Bishops of Monasteries be proof of the Primitive way And are Monasteries of such Primitive foundation There could be surely no Bishop in the Monasteries before there were such places And we read not of any such till the fourth Century and of no Bishops in them till afterwards and those too as rare and extraordinary in ancient times as simplicity in Courts or sincerity and candor among Dissenters But let us consider what he brings (d) Prim. Ep. p. 38. Barses and Eulogius had (e) Soz. l. 6. c. 34 32. Ed. Val. a Monastery for their Diocese no City nor Territory and one Lazarus also If our Author had transcrib'd but two words more out of Sozomen he had spoiled all his his Argument But because nothing goes more against the Conscience of a Dissenter than Ingenuity out of tenderness to that Infirmity I will supply the omission Sozomen does indeed say (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that these were not made Bishops of any City but only for honour's sake and as it were by way of recompence for what they had done These then were Titular or Honorary Bishops according to this Historian and therefore of little use to prove what was the measure of Primitive Dioceses To these our Author says we may add those Monasticks which Epiphanius (g) Epiph. Expos Fid. p. 1095. speaks of one of them a Bishop in the Desart of Egypt the other in mount Sinai who having received Episcopal Consecration took upon them to do Episcopal Acts and to sit as Bishops He might if he had pleased have taken some notice that this reading is not only suspected but plainly faulty And Petavius has noted in the Margin that it should be read with a negative that these Monks having not received Ordination as Bishops did yet presume to act as such This is plain from what goes before for Epiphanius shewing the Extravagance of some Monks and men of severe lives says (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that one Zacchaeus being a Lay-man presumed to administer the Sacrament and then follow the two above-mentioned who took upon them the office of Bishops without being ordained For what extravagance or fault could it appear for persons who had been consecrated Bishops to administer the office committed to them But they are here censured (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as men who presum'd rashly and insolently to act as Bishops from I know not what dreams and as the sense must be without ordination I wonder our Author should think fit to dissemble this since it is more for the service of his party than any thing he has produced to have some ancient instance to countenance the practice of assuming the Pastoral office without Ordination The next instance (l) P. 38. of a Bishop of a Monastery is from the subscriptions of the Council of Chalcedon where we have Helpidius Bishop Thermensis Monasterij We own this Monastery to be a mistake not of our Author indeed but of the old Translator of those subscriptions who finding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek subscriptions render'd it Monastery whereas it signifies a Mansion or a Stage-Town in the publick Course or Post-road as we now speak In some Manuscripts we have both words Mansio and Monasterium some have Mansio only as that of Paris and Dijon which Baluzius (m) Baluz Nov. Coll. Conc. p. 1031. mentions and Berterius (n) Mansio Thermensis Berter Pithan
but 500 or as he reckons 900 Dioceses in Africk there were no more Towns or Villages in the whole Country He is pleased to add that he never yet could see any proof any instance of a small Village that had so extended a Territory under one Bishop But did he ever see an instance of a Bishop who had no Diocese but the single Village in which he resided Or has he ever seen the limits of such a Bishoprick described If he have why does he not produce it For one such instance had been worth his whole Chapter about Village Bishops If he have not why does he use so much confidence when he is wholly in the dark There are but very few ancient Dioceses that are delivered down to us with an account of their Circuit But we happen to know the number that was of old in several Countries and from thence can infer in general of the greatness and smallness of the Bishopricks And to give our Author one instance more in a Country he quotes for Village-Bishops In Cyprus in Sozomen's time it was usual to have Bishops in Villages and yet in all that Island at that very time there were but nine Bishops under one Metropolitan as appears from the subscriptions of the Council of Chalcedon (t) Conc. Chalc. Act. 6 15. For in the Copy of subscriptions publish'd by Labbe from the Papers of Sirmond there are six Subscribers from that Island And again the Metropolitan subscribing with several others for his Suffragans that were absent had but three remaining to subscribe for And therefore we must conclude that either the Village-Bishops had a considerable Territory or the City Bishopricks were enormously great At last this Chapter concerning Village-Bishops is brought to a Conclusion and upon the whole matter I conceive two points to be very clear 1. That although there were some Bishops seated in Villages yet it does by no means follow that they were but Pastors to a single Congregation 2. That a great number of places which our Author took to be Villages are prov'd to be Cities before he can find any Bishops to be seated there So that either the skill and the diligence of Mr. Clerkson were not so great as his friends give out who in these matters are very implicit believers or else we must complain of want of ingenuity and fair dealing a fault which the Saints are very easy to forgive when it is committed in pure zeal to their Cause but we Church of England men take for one of the blackest sins CHAP. III. AFter a tedious Journey through Villages and obscure places we are at last come to Cities and may hope now for a nobler Subjuct of our enquiry and observation But to our great disappointment and mortification we are inform'd by our Author (a) Prim. ep p. 45. That far the most part of them viz. those that were very little and those that were not great were for their largness but like our Villages or market Towns They are much to blame who have hitherto admir'd the magnificence of Greek and Roman Cities and pretend to judge of their former greatness by the ruins that remain as we discover the stature of Giants by some of their Bones Whereas these celebrated Cities were far the most of them as we are now told not superior to Putney or Batersey or to say the utmost to Kingston or Colebrook But to make out this Paradox our Author (b) Prim. ep p. 46. enters into a critical dispute concerning the Greek and Hebrew word for City and shews that some have bestow'd the title of City upon those places that others call Villages City says he is not only City but Town because according to one Evangelist (c) Luk. 10.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Saviour saith whatsoever City ye enter According to another (cc) Math. 10.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whatsoever City or Village And again in one place (d) Luk. 4.43 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Math. 9.35 he tells the Capernaites he must preach in other Cities In another place (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and upon another occasion our Saviour is said to go about all Cities and Villages preaching And in another place (f) Mark 1.38 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 joyns both the words in one let us go into the chief Villages But these instances are so far from proving that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a Village that some of them do plainly shew the quite contrary for they distinguish between Cities and Villages And the other where Cities are only mention'd and Villages imply'd they are there to be understood not from the notion of the word but from the nature of the thing For instance suppose one were order'd to preach to all the Citizens of Rome and by vertue of this order should preach to the Strangers and Servants there shall therefore a Citizen signifie a stranger or a slave yet from the nature of the thing these might be understood to be included tho' not from the signification of the word and tho' another relation of this order should add the particulars omitted yet the former word Citizens would not have a double sense If one should say he had view'd a certain house and at another time speaking of the same thing should say he had view'd the house and gardens does therefore a house signifie a garden The less principal parts are often omitted in ordinary discourse tho' when men speak with more exactness they are enumerated Our Saviour and his Disciples may have enter'd some times into solitary and alone Houses as well as into Villages and if one of the Evangelists had happen'd to have added this must therefore a Village or a City signifie a simple house (g) Prim. ep p. 46. Bethlem is Luke 2.38 the City of David but no other than a Village John 7.24 Which Epiphanius (h) Epiph. Haer. 51. takes notice of and gives this reason for it That it was reduc'd to small compass and had very few inhabitants And what can be more directly against our Author's purpose than this reason For it is call'd a City with respect to its ancient greatness and a Village in respect of its present mean condition as the same man by an usual civility is stil'd by an office he once bore tho' he be reduc'd to a meaner place yet the one title does by no means signifie or imply the other But this instance of Bethlem will prove yet more prejudicial to the cause of Congregational Episcopacy upon another account For the design of our Author in disparaging Cities by making the title common to Villages is to shew what mean places those were that made up the Dioceses of ancient Bishops whereas this instance overthrows that vain imagination and proves the quite contrary For this place which is call'd City had never any Bishop of its own for above a thousand years after Christ but was part of the Diocese of
Alexandria And thus perhaps may Cornelius his expression in Eusebius be best understood that in the Catholick Church there ought to be but one Bishop For although in one City there may be many Parish-Churches appointed for the use of the several quarters where they are placed yet is there but one common or general or Catholick Church in one City Rome had many Churches when the schism of Vrsicinus happened to divide it and long before that time there were no less than forty Yet Socrates (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 4. c. 29. speaking of the ordination of Vrsicinus observes that it was not done in the Church but in a private place of the Church called Sicine or Sicininus (m) Ammian Marcell l. 27. c. 3. that is in the Church of Sicininus which was but an obscure place in comparison of the great Church In Constantinople there were many Churches from the beginning Yet in Constantius his time Socrates (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 2. 16. speaks of the Emperours order to drive Paul out of the Church of that place and to put Macedonius into possession of it Wherefore (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. ibid. after Paul was sent to banishment the Prefect took Macedonius and brought him toward the Church and when they came near to the Church and the people strove to get into the Church Though all the while it is notorious (p) Socr. l. 2. c. 12. there were many Churches in the place though this was then the Cathedral Or if our Author may fancy this City still to have but one Church yet we have the same language long after even in Chrysostom's time who upon his return is said (q) Socr. l. 6. c. 16. Pallad Vit. Chrys p. 15 16 24 25. Chrys Ep. ad Innocent to be brought by the people to the Church And by this time sure there must be many Churches in that City or some unkown destruction must have befaln those magnificent houses of God in that place so much celebrated by some of the Writers of that age So the inference our Author draws from this expression the Church of Berytus to the exclusion of all other Churches proves a mistake But he proceeds to observe farther (r) Prim. Ep. p. 85. that Tyre was one of the most illustrious Cities of the East yet Paulinus Bishop there in Constantine's time had but so many under his Episcopal charge (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 276. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 285. as he could take a personal notice of their souls and accurately examine the inward state of every one acquainting himself thoroughly with the condition of all those souls that were committed to him And that you may be sure that all this is just and exact without Hyperbole he quotes his Author as the Panegyrist in Eusebius informs us l. 10. c. 4. It is usual in Panegyricks to raise things beyond nature and the strictness of truth and it is allowed as long as the proportions and resemblance of the things so represented are preserved What therefore if Eusebius by all this citation should intend only to commend the diligence and the penetration of that Bishop of Tyre that he had the gift of discerning spirits and of judging aright whose repentance was sincere and therefore to be received into communion whose conversion was unfeigned and therefore to be admitted to baptism who was best qualified for the respective offices of the Church If he should mean no more by these high expressions he would not exceed much the allowances given to such kinds of discourse and I think they are more to blame that would force a complement into a Syllogism It is scarce worth the while to say so much as is necessary for the illustration of this passage only to shew at last to how little purpose it was alledged Yet since this instance of Tyre comes in among the rest because he esteemed it more satisfactory than ordinary I m st beg the Reader 's patience to explain the matter Eusebius (t) Euseb E. H. l. 10. c. 4. p. 376. in his Panegyrick delivered at the Dedication of the Church of Tyre commends not only the fabrick but the spiritual Church or the Christians of that City And this Temple says the Panegyrist is very great indeed and worthy of God The inside of this Temple who can describe who can look into it but the great high Priest who alone has authority to enter into this Holy of holies and to search the secrets of the heart And happily it may be given to one more in the second place and by way of substitute that is to him who sits there the leader of this noble Army To him therefore as a high Priest after Christ it may be lawful to look into the most secret parts of your souls or as Mr. Clerkson translates to take a personal notice of your souls and to examine the inward state of every one Now Eusebius says not the least word that Paulinus had but so many under his charge that he could look into all their souls but (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 10. c. 4. p. 385. that it was lawful for him to do so to be an inspector or Bishop of their souls And this to be understood with respect to the Bishops office who received the publick confessions in the Church and was the Judge of the sincerity of the profession as far as Ecclesiastical Discipline was concerned And all this might be said although he had had forty Parish-Churches within his City Valesius mentions a marginal note of some Greek set against this place in a Manuscript that he had seen detesting it as a wicked and blasphemous passage He thought Eusebius had spoken those things of Christ which he directed to the Bishop But though there are some expressions below the majesty of Christ yet are there others that are something too high to be offered to man The other passage out of the same Oration that speaks of Paulinus as thoroughly acquainting himself with all those souls committed to him will appear as little to our Author's purpose if we do but observe what goes before it For Eusebius speaking to those who had defiled their consciences in the Persecution by complying with the wicked decrees of the Persecutors And you says he whose consciences a little while ago were polluted and overwhelmed by profane commands have your minds now cleansed by the terrours of God's law and are by him committed to the Bishop who as he is otherwise of excellent judgment so hath he a singular sagacity in judging of the thoughts of souls These words then are directed to such as had fallen in the late Persecution and were now in the state of Penitents or had lately been so And it is with respect to them that the discretion of the Bishops is commended that he can see into the very secret of their hearts
Vigil all the people are said to answer Amen to the Prayer which Vigilius their Bishop made Pelagius is said in St. Peter's Church in Rome to have gone up into the Pulpit and satisfy'd (e) Satisfecit cuncto populo plebi quia nullum malum fecisset contra Vigilium Lib. Pont. in Pelag. all the people that he had done Vigilius his predecessor no harm Gregory the Great is said to be chosen by (f) Gregonium Diaconum plebs omnis elegit Greg. Turon l. x. c. 1. Joh. Diacon l. 1. c. 39. 40. all the people tho' at that time in Rome there were neither Heathen nor Sectaries to make any abatements in the Bishops flock Nay if our Author will insist rigidly upon this phrase all Israel in the time of Samuel was no more than could meet in one place to hear Samuel who is said (g) 1 Sam. 12.1.4 to speak to all Israel and they answer him that he had neither oppressed nor defrauded them But our Author proceeds (h) Prim. ep p. 92. They were no more after Anno. 250 than could all together in the Church importune Cornelius for the readmission of the Ordeiners of Novatian The whole people interceeding for him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 6. c. 43. Our Author according to his usual ingenuity has left out a word that spoiled his argument and limited this expression For Cornelius does not say that all the Christian people of Rome importuned him (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that all the people that was present with him did interceed They were no more than could concur in an Epistle to salute their Brethren at Carthage Salutant vos fratres tota Ecclesia Cypr. ep 3. As tho' the general salutation of a Church could not be sent without the actual concurrence of every member How many publick acts bear the name of the people tho' the twentieth part was not present when they were made Or shall we fancy that all the Citizens of Rome met in one Assembly to pass every order that bears the title of Senatus Populusque Romanus (l) Prim. ep p. 93. They were no more than Cornelius could read Cyprians Letters to in their numerous Assembly amplissimae plebi They were no more than could all be present about consultations about matters of concernment c. Consultis omnibus ipsis stantibus laicis Cypr. ep 26. A Bishop may communicate Letters and Propoposals concerning Ecclesiastical Discipline in a full Congregation and to all the people then present and yet this cannot imply that there are no more Christians or no other Congregation in that City Whatsoever is done in publick and before a Congregation that is unlimited is in the common way of speaking said to be done before all the Community I meet with nothing says our Author (m) Prim. ep p. 93. that makes any shew of a probability that their numbers were more at that time but Cornelius his Catalogue of Officers and the number of the poor which were fifteen hundred Euseb l. 6. c. 37. This passage has not hitherto received any answer that made so much as a shew of probability And that which our Author replieth to the number of Officers hath been long since (n) Vindic. prim ch p. 51. shewed to be frivolous As to the number of Officers the shew will vanish Mr. Clerkson fancies if it be considered that it was the custom of those ancient times to multiply Officers beyond what was necessary yea so much that as Nazianzen (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Naz Or. 1. tells us the Officers were sometimes as many as they had the charge of It might be excusable in Mr. Baxter to confound times of persecution with times of settlement and the middle of the third Century with the latter end of the fourth for he was too hasty to be curious and looked not the date of the Fable so it happened upon a time or shortly after he was contented But from Mr. Clerkson something might be expected more exact what will this shew of probability vanish and no likelyhood that there were more Congregations in Rome than one remain from six and forty Presbyters in Cornelius his time because it was the custom of Nazianzen's times to multiply Officers beyond what was necessary Forty six Presbyters were never accounted necessary to one Congregation even in the most prosperous times of the Church nor can any instance be given of so many relating to one Assembly in any age accounted ancient tho' it might be fashionable then to multiply Church Officers But for this we are at a greater certainty for Cornelius (p) Euseb H.E. l. 6. c. 43. assures us that this number was not for state nor for form without use and necessity but exceeding necessary and that upon the account of an infinite and numberless people And if the multitude of Christians in Rome was then so great as to require forty six Presbyters we may make some guess at the proportion they might have to the people of Rome after it had been entirely converted in the fifth and sixth Centuries for in those times the Presbyters of Rome were scarce a third part more than those in the Catalogue of Cornelius as we may gather from the subscriptions of the Presbyters in the Roman (q) Synod Rom. 1. sub Symmach Subs Pres 67. Council Nay in one Synod (r) Cum Episc omnibus Rom. Eccl. Presbyteris Greg. Reg. l. 4. ep 44. under Gregory the Great there are but thirty four Presbyters that subscribe I do not intend to say that two thirds of that City was then Christian but the Christians of that place under Cornelius seem to be at least two thirds in respect of all Rome in after ages when it was much diminished from its ancient greatness and when it seems to have no more than seventy Parish Presbyters This number therefore of forty six Presbyters all necessary for so great a people as the Christians of Rome then were makes it evident notwithstanding the frivolous exception of our Author that the believers of that City could not all assemble together upon any religious occasion and that the Church there must consequently be distributed to several Parishes and Congregations (s) Prim. ep p. 94. As to the other how to compute the numbers of the Roman Church by the number of the poor I know no better way than to observe what proportion there was betwixt these in other places But the ground of this exception is a mistake For Cornelius does not say that the number of all the poor Christians in Rome was but fifteen hundred but that so many were maintained by the publick stock of the Church besides the necessary Officers Now there might be many more poor maintained some by Relations others by private Charities and it is plain from the account that Chrysostom gives of the poor of Antioch and the number in the Church-Book that those
floor but the Bishop and Presbyters seats and such places from whence any of the Church Officers spoke or read to the people It is not therefore so plain as it seemed to Mr. Baxter that all could hear in such an assembly as this Now where a multitude is so numerous that the greater part cannot be partakers of the service for which they are assembled it seems to be no longer one Congregation since it cannot attain that purpose which brings them together And therefore is a Congregation for shew and solemnity and not for edification and religious service Nor can any bounds be assigned to such an Assembly for a Nation may be brought together in that manner And therefore when a multitude though crowded together in one place becomes uncapable of attaining the end of Religious Assemblies it has out-grown the Congregational standard as much as if it were dispersed in forty distant places At a Coronation all the people in Westminster Abby may be thought but one Congregation yet the greatest part hear no more of what is said than those who are ten miles off They may joyn in one common acclamation as that Alexandrian Assembly did in an Amen so they might though they were twenty times as many So that such a notion of a Congregation runs on to infinite And that of which we are speaking being in all probability of this sort it exceeded the bounds of the pretended Primitive Episcopacy and is of no use in the present question However the whole multitude met in the great Church which was large enough to receive them all But what multitude all the Christians of the City No Mr. Baxter will not say that Or all that were willing or had opportunity to attend the publick devotions of the day Athanasius says not that neither but that there was so great confluence that the Parish-Churches could not hold them But there was no other Congregation of Athanasius his Communion in Alexandria on that Easter-day beside this great one for the universal Harmony and Concurrence of the people had not been so visible if (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they had met in parcels and therefore there were no such meetings Still the question recurs what people all the Alexandrians of his Communion Nothing he says can be extended so far or made to comprehend any more than the multitude assembled at that time with intention to be present with the Bishop This is all the people and all the multitude that he mentions in this part of his defence But these were all his flock for universal Harmony of all the people was visible This may be said of any general Congregation assembled from all parts though all individuals nor perhaps half of them do not appear For Leo the Great about the middle of the fifth Century speaks to his Congregation in the same manner though in all probability not the twentieth part of the Christians of Rome were present In you says he (i) In vobis pietatem Christianae unitatis agnosco sicut enim ipsa frequentia testatur Intelligitis enim honorem totius gregis celebrari per annua festa Pastoris Leo. Serm. Anniv 3. I can plainly see the piety of Christian unity as your confluence does declare and you understand that the honour of the whole flock is celebrated in the Anniversaries of the Pastor Now to make up this image of Christian unity it was not necessary all the people of the City should flow to the Bishops Church but only that the Congregation should be very great though not so as to exclude all others Notwithstanding this expression there might be several other Assemblies in that City at the same time Nor was it otherwise at Alexandria as we may judge by a passage in the Bishops Defence He was accused for having dedicated a Church which the Emperour had built without his order because the holding of the Pascal Assemby there was a sort of Dedication But the Bishop protests (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apol. ad Const p. 682. to the Emperour that he was so far from any such design that this very Assembly was altogether accidental for he had given the people no notice nor summons to meet there Now the Parish Presbyters of Alexandria cannot well be supposed to leave their Churches unsupplied upon a presumption that all the people would assemble with the Bishop and they could not but know that his Church could not hold a tenth part of them for all the Churches in the City could not receive them all and this new Church not yet finished or dedicated they could not think of Therefore in all probability they assembled their Parishes then as they did on other times unless we may fancy that on Easter they always attended the Bishop and so for all the Easters before this left much the greatest part of the people without any service on that solemn time For but few of them could crowd into the Bishops Church before that great one was built and the number of the Catholick Christians had been greater than were at this time of which we are speaking To conclude all the Alexandrians of the Catholick Communion were not present with their Bishop in the new Church Those that came made a very great multitude and such as the other Churches could not hold considering they had each a Congregation already These could not be dispersed in the other Churches without danger These were proper to represent Catholick unity and in short were a Congregation suitable to the time though it might not comprehend all the Christians of that great City Our Author goes on to prove the Church of Alexandria no more than could meet in one Congregation (m) Prim. ep p. 98. Alexander the Predecessour of Athanasius assembled the whole multitude in the Church called Theonas the other Churches being all strait and little But still this multitude is not said to be the whole of the Alexandrine Church but only of the Bishops Congregation There is yet another kind of proof which he thinks might be as satisfactory to some and refers to Mr. Baxter's Ch. History p. 9 10. Here I must own my self of his opinion for both are equally satisfactory and this to which he refers has been (n) Vindic. Prim. Ch. p. 58. sufficiently answered He thinks the Premises so evident that there is no need of Dionysius 's observation that Alexandria in his time was not by much so populous as of old the old men being more in number formerly than both old and young in his days If there was no need of this observation he is the more inexcusable for attempting to put upon his Reader without any necessity If any one should undertake to prove that London is not so populous now as it was a hundred years ago because a great Mortality happened there about five and twenty years since and at the end of that pestilence all sorts of Inhabitants might not then equal even the
about limits the Apostles made no new distributions but followed the form of the Empire planting in every City a compleat and entire Church that consisted not only of the Inhabitants of the City but of the Region belonging to it If any were converted and if their distance or number made them incapable of repairing to the city-City-Church upon all their Religious occasions they had Congregations apart and subordinate Officers to attend them as it was in the civil disposition our Saviour having appointed several Orders in his Church and the Apostles propagating those and appointing some new as occasion required Only as in greater causes the Country people sued in the City Courts so likewise in such causes of Religion that concerned the whole community such as that of receiving in and turning out of the communion the Christians of the Territory were under the authority of the City-Church Hence it is that the Canons of ancient Councils mention a Territory belonging to every City Bishop The thirty fourth Canon (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Ap. 34. of those called Apostolick forbids a Bishop to do any thing without the concurrence of his Metropolitan but what related to his own Diocese and the Territories under it And the ninth of Nice that provides so favourably for the Puritans when they should return to the communion of the Church supposeth Bishops to have a considerable Diocese besides their City For by this it is ordered that if a Bishop of the Puritans should embrace Catholick Communion and there were another Bishop of the Catholick Church in the same City that then (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Nicen. 8. the Puritan should either retain the title of a Bishop in the same City if the other did think fit or else be received as a Presbyter But least this may have the appearance of two Bishops in the same Town some place is to be provided for him that he may be either a Chorepiscopus or a Presbyter in the Country The Synod of Antioch forbids the Presbyters of the Territories to send Canonical letters and in another gives the Bishop of the City full authority (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Antioch 9. to order Ecclesiastical affairs not only in his City but in the whole Territory that belongs to it to ordain Presbyters and Deacons to exercise Jurisdiction within the extent of his Diocese And in the next Canon forbids (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Antioch 10. the Chorepiscopi to ordain Presbyters or Deacons in the Country without the consent of the Bishop of the City to which they and the Territory did belong The Council of Elvira speaks of Deacons (a) Diaconus regens plebem Can. Eliber 77. that had Country cures and that the Bishop to whom they belonged was to perfect those who were baptized by these Curees by confirmation Basil (b) Basil ep 192. salutes the Country Clergy of the Diocese of Nicopolis distinct from those of the City and Theodoret who had a Diocese forty miles square reckoned (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. ep 42. his Episcopacy of divine institution and that his large Territory as well as his City was committed into his hands by God Theodosius Bishop of Synnada is said to drive the Macedonian Hereticks not only out of his City but (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 7. c. 3. out of all his Territories And Eustathius (e) Basil ep 73. overthrew all the Altars of Basilides in all the Territory of Gangrae And Synesius writing to the whole Church of Ptolemais addresseth to the people of the City and to those of the Country Parishes that belonged to it It would be an endless labour to alledge all the instances of this nature since nothing is more obvious and occurs more frequently in Ecclesiastical Writers I have shewed how great Territories belonged anciently to the Greek and Roman Cities how unlike their constitution was to ours and especially in this respect I have also shewed that the civil and Ecclesiastical Territories were the same and Mr. Clerkson confesses it His demands therefore concerning this matter receive a full answer and the proof which he (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes ep 11. required not without intimation of despair made good and beyond all reasonable exception To make this matter yet more clear I will instance in some Bishopricks whose extent are known or so much at leastwise as discovers them to be Dioceses consisting of many Country Parishes besides the City Churches I will begin with the Bishoprick of Theodoret because the limits of it have been described with greatest exactness and particularity The Diocese of Cyrus was forty miles in length and as much in breadth And Theodoret (h) Theod. ep 42. proceeds to describe it so minutely that he sets down the number of acres together with the condition and tenure of the land There were fifty thousand free from any service ten thousand belonging to the Fisc about fifteen thousand more subject to taxes but unable to pay according to the proportion then set So that this instance seems clear beyond all exception And as to the Ecclesiastical state of this Territory in his Epistle to Leo he says (i) Theod. ep 113. there were eight hundred Churches in it all belonging to his care Yet some have endeavoured to take off the evidence of this Epistle to Leo when it was urged by the learned Bishop of Worcester Mr. Baxter suspects it because it came from the Vatican Library and Mr. Clerkson (l) No evid of Dioc. Ep. p. 39. suggests the same suspition But this frivolous cavil hath been answered by the same hand that alledged the instance I will take the liberty to add only this that it happens fortunately to this Epistle that it hath an ancient voucher and a clear testimony in the next age after it was written For Liberatus (m) Quos secutus Theodoretus Papae suggessit quanta mala pertulerit rogans ut tali causae subveniretur Liber Brev. c. 12. makes mention of it and informs us that Theodoret wrote to Leo suggesting how much he had suffered of Dioscorus and desiring that for the remedy of these evils another Council might be called And (n) Constat ex ep p. 113 116. Garner in Liber p. 83. Garnerius in his observation upon this place directs us to this Epistle to Leo. Mr. Clerkson instead of eight hundred Churches constantly reads eighty without so much as giving notice that it is only his conjecture But be the number how it will we must lay aside all thoughts of Congregational Episcopacy in this Region Another exception against this instance is offered by Mr. Clerkson (o) No evid of Dioc. p. 39. that this was not a Diocese but a Province and that Theodoret was a Metropolitan And for this he quotes the learned Author whose testimonies he pretended to answer although he expresly says that this is not to be
ordain and if any of them should have presumed against the rule of the Church in that particular the Church of those times would not only have declared the Ordination null but a prodigy and think that Antichrist was at hand and the world drawing towards an end when such new and unexampled confusions were permitted to arise What sentence shall we think would they have pronounced upon Presbyterian Ordinations when they did not stick (s) Can. Nic. 9 10 16. Can. Ant. 73. to rescind Orders conferred by Bishops against the Canons and established discipline of the Church and in some cases to (t) Nic. Can. 19. re-ordain Aerius who declared there was no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter is represented by Epiphanius (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Haer. 74. n. 1. 3. as a prodigy and his opinion madness though there is no mention at all of his Ordinations But the case of the Ordinations of our Dissenters is peculiar and they do forreign Churches great wrong when they concern them in their quarrel For first the Independents have no root of Orders but their Pastors are of Lay Original extraction The Presbyterians have Ordination from Presbyters not only without but in opposition to Bishops against all the established rules of this Church against the Laws of the Country as well as practice of ancient Churches And if upon this account we pronounce them void we do no more than what all the Protestant Churches abroad would do in the like case If some Deacons or Lay-men would take upon them to ordain Pastors in the French Churches for separate Congregations in opposition to the received discipline setled in their general Synods I would appeal to any Minister of those Churches whether he held such an Ordination valid And yet by the principles of those Churches Lay-men may confer orders in some cases as appears (x) Hist Eccles T. 1. l. 2. by the first Ordination in Paris where there was no Presbyter present and by the confession of Beza (y) Hist Eccles T. 1. l. 4. in the Conference of Poissy Nay though a Presbyter deposed by their Synod should take upon him to ordain I still appeal to the Ministers of those Churches whether they would account the Orders valid If we therefore do judge such Ordinations here to be nullities because administred by subordinate Officers against the Laws of the Church in opposition to their superiours and against the practice and discipline of the Primitive Christians we cannot be thought singular in this judgment since all ancient Churches would have done the same thing and all the Protestant Churches in Europe in the like case would follow our example It is in vain to cite Jerom and Chrysostom to lessen the difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter because both may do almost all the same things Yet is Ordination still excepted and accounted the peculiar prerogative of the Bishop And though in some Churches Presbyters did assist the Bishop in ordaining Presbyters which is likewise the practice of our Church yet is there no instance of their ordaining without a Bishop FINIS Books Printed for James Adamson I. VIta Reginaldi Poli Cardinalis ac Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi Acta Disceptationis inter Legatos Angliae Galliae in Concilio Constantiensi de utriusque Gentis Dignitate Praerogativa in Conciliorum Tomis desiderata Libri Rarissimi olim quidem Editi sed paucis noti ac nullis facile obvii Octavo II. Pauli Colomesii Observationes sacrae Editio secunda auctior emendatior accedunt ejusdem Paralipomena de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis Passio sancti Victoris Massiliensis ab eodem emendata Editio quarta ultima longe auctior emendatior Octavo III. The Travels of Monsieur de Thevenot into the Levant In three parts viz. 1. Into Turky 2. Persia 3. The East-Indies In Folio IV. Mr. Chillingworth's Book called The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation made more generally useful by omitting Personal Contests but inserting whatsoever concerns the common Cause of Protestants or defends the Church of England with an exact Table of Contents and an Addition of some genuine Pieces of Mr. Chillingworth's never before printed viz. against the Infallibility of the Roman Church Transubstantiation Tradition c. And an Account of what moved the Author to turn Papist with his Confutation of the said Motives In Quarto V. A Treatise of the Celibacy of the Clergy wherein its Rise and Progress are Historically considered Quarto VI. A Treatise proving Scripture to be the Rule of Faith writ by Reginald Peacock Bishop of Chichester before the Reformation about the Year 1450. VII Doubts concerning the Roman Infallibility 1. Whether the Church of Rome believe it 2. Whether Jesus Christ or his Apostles ever Recommended it 3. Whether the Primitive Church knew or used that way of deciding Controversies VIII A brief Historical Account of the Behaviour of the Jesuits and their Faction for the first twenty five Years of Queen Elizabeth's Reign with an Epistle of W. Watson a Secular Priest shewing how they were thought of by other Romanists of that time Quarto IX A brief Examination of the present Roman Catholick Faith contained in Pope Pius his new Creed by the Scriptures Ancient Fathers and their own Modern Writers In Quarto
to some other Diocese it was not to be denied them Another time it is ordered that where a Diocese was divided between a Catholick Bishop and a Donatist and the later with his people returned to Catholick Communion (g) Aug. Gest cum Emer Cod. Afr. c 112. they might both be Bishops of that Diocese and upon the death of one the other was to succeed to the whole or if the people should be offended with this unusual sight of two Bishops in one Diocese then both should resign and the Diocese left to a new choice But after the Decree of Marcellinus and the confirmation of it by the Imperial Rescript the case was alter'd For then (h) Col. Carth. in fin Cod. Theod. l. 55. de Haeret. Anno 414. Cod. Afr. c. 12. Ed. Zon. 99. ap Bin. 102. Ed. Til. every Innovation of the Donatists was declared void and those Dioceses of theirs which had been branches of others and torn from them in the schism were now to revert to the first dependance The Donatists therefore are not to come into the number of the African Bishops by vertue of that Canon for at the end of the Canon it self the Imperial Law was afterwards added as an advertisement of its being repeal'd The Canon then was made before the Conference and consequently before the computation of S. Augustin But after the Conference and the Law the door was shut and the Donatist Bishopricks if they had been parts of others were restored to them and no provision made for the Bishops though they should happen to be converted After the time of S. Augustin we do not find the African Bishopricks much increased For within fifty years of the death of that Bishop we have an account (i) Not. Afr. apd Sirm. Miscel of all the Dioceses in that Country which amounted to 466. out of which must be deducted eight for Sardinia which did not belong to the Roman Africk But I am afraid the Proconsular Africk is imperfect in the Notitia if Victor Vitensis (l) Vict. Persec Vand. l. 1. his account may be taken or there be not some Error in the Copy But not to insist much upon small matters and uncertain let us calculate the Bishopricks of such Provinces of Africk of which we have a more distinct account In the two Mauritanias in the African Notitia we have 173 Bishopricks of which six were then void Now both these Provinces according to Pliny are 839 miles long and 480 broad The Country must surely be very ill peopled if every sorry Village had a Bishop nay if every Bishop had not 60 or 70 Villages in his Diocese Nay if we consider the extent of the whole Roman Africk we shall have little reason to conclude that Congregational Episcopacy should follow from the great number of Bishops in that Country Procopius (m) Proc. p. Vand. l. 1. who was acquainted with the Country having attended Bellisarius in his African Expedition tells us that the Roman Africk was ninety days Journey in length and that we might better understand his reckoning he tells us that a days Journey was 210 Stadia or 26 miles and a quarter which amounts to above 2360 miles The breadth was unequal in both the Mauritanias near five hundred miles in the Proconsular Africk two hundred This Province was so populous (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Herodian l. 7. ss 9. and so fertile that Egypt cannot be thought to surpass it And for Bizacena the account Pliny (o) Iâ—in l. 5. c. 4. gives of its fertility is prodigious for the Husbandman there receiv'd a hundred-fold Now in this Country so vast and so populous let us take a low estimate of the number of Villages that might be there and reckon them at forty thousand and these divided into 500 Dioceses every Diocese will have fourscore Towns That this may not seem an extravagant Calculation let us compare it with other Countries France is not half so big as the Roman Africk and yet in Lewis 13 his time it had above two and thirty thousand Parishes as Bertius reckons And in Henry the third's time by a Tax laid on every Parish they were found (p) Bodin de Rep. to be near five and twenty thousand the Provinces of Burgundy and Poictou not reckoned which may make up the remainder Now it is well known that there as well as here there are many more Villages than Parishes and therefore I conceive I cannot over-reckon them when I set a Country for extent double to France and of which a great part was more populous at almost an equal number for Villages But suppose the number yet less by one half every Bishoprick will have forty Villages which is too much yet for the Congregational way especially since upon this reckoning Towns must be thin and at greater distance and so less fitted for personal Communion with their Bishop Nay though they had at last been reduced by the Iniquity of times and the Opposition of parties to the measure of our Parishes yet the condition of those Churches would move our pity rather than our desire of imitation and condition so different from all other Countries and so unlike that of Africk it self when Cyprian lived For all the African Bishops of his time could not have supplied the Dioceses of one Province at the time of which we are speaking But for all this when Mr. Baxter or Mr. Clerkson will have it so what is last must be primitive what sprung from the unfortunate divisions of one Country must be a Precedent to all And that must be received as Apostolick practice which was introduced by one of the most heady and desperate and Hypocritical Sects that ever divided the Church of Christ But I am afraid we may say with too much truth that our Country has out-done Africk in Monsters of this nature Yet after all this distraction there remain'd in Africk several large Dioceses which has been fully proved in other Books (q) Unreasonabl of Separ 249 250. and Sequ. Vindic. of Prim. Ch. p. 524 525. c. and needs not be repeated in this place though I shall not omit to take notice before I have done of those exceptions which Mr. Clerkson has made in another Book against the Evidence for Diocesan Episcopacy in Africk In the end of this Chapter our Author thinks fit to engage Bishop Taylor who answering an Objection concerning Asclepius (r) Gennad Catal. Script Bishop of a small Village in the Territory of Vaga or Baga shews that he was a Bishop of a Territory as well as of a Village and for this cites Trithemius (s) Trithem de Script Eccles I confess that the expression of Trithemius does not conclude either for the largeness or straitness of that Bishoprick which may be very large though the Episcopal seat be a Village or narrow though it have a City to give it denomination unless our Author thinks that because there were